A study of U.S. presidential debates between 1976 and 2012 found that
matching certain aspects of an opponent's language can lead to a bump
in the polls, according to newswise.com.

"Linguistic style matching," says a University of
Michigan professor who led the study, has nothing to do with tone,
cadence or the number of times one candidate interrupts the other. Nor
is it about content—the nouns and regular verbs that make up "what" a
speaker says.

It's much more subtle. Linguistic-style-matching
zeroes in on so-called function words that reflect how a speaker is
making a point. It refers to conjunctions like "also," "but" and
"unless;" quantifiers like "all," "remaining" and "somewhat;" and other
supporting parts of speech.

Guess it leaves out all the four-letter and nasty slang words for women's body parts.

"These function words are inherently social, and they require social
knowledge to understand and use," adds study author Daniel Romero, an
assistant professor in the U-M School of Information, as well as in
computer science and engineering. "We think that matching an opponent's
linguistic style shows greater perspective- taking and also makes one's
argument's easier to understand for third-party viewers."

The eight style markers they evaluated in the study amount to 444 words:
quantifiers, conjunctions, adverbs, auxiliary verbs, prepositions,
articles, personal pronouns and impersonal pronouns. Examples include
"about," "especially," "perhaps," "must," "might," "these" and "our."
Each candidate in each debate was given a score for how closely they
matched their opponent's linguistic style according to these parameters,
when their opponent had been the first to speak.

Then the team
examined Gallup polls and meshed the data. They found that linguistic-style-matchers gained a median of one point. And those that didn't match
lost a median of one percentage point in the polls.

"We already
knew a lot about how linguistic-matching can affect a relationship
between two people. It can lead to better outcomes for negotiators, for
example. In this case, we were interested in something different,"
Romero says. "And that's when a third person is watching the exchange
and judging who is doing a better job. We didn't know a lot about that
before."

The outcome didn't surprise Romero.

"We think
linguistic-style-matching is linked to processing fluency and if that's
the case, it helps the third person have an easier time understanding
the candidate's response," he explains.

No candidate over the years
stood out as being a supreme style-matcher. Some did well in particular
debates, only to get low marks in others against the same opponent. And
poll data didn't always correlate with election outcomes.

For example, Gerald Ford received a positive linguistic-style-matching score of .02 in the '76 election's first debate. His poll
numbers spiked 6.5 percentage points. In contrast, Carter's linguistic
matching score was -.53. He was not adept in that case at mirroring how
Ford made his points. Carter's poll numbers dropped by 2 points. But it
was Carter who prevailed in November.

In contrast, the first
debate of 2000 turns out to have predicted the White House inhabitant.
George W. Bush matched Al Gore well, for a score of 1.43. He rose two
percentage points in the polls. Gore, on the other hand, got a negative
matching score of -0.41. He fell in the polls by three points.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

For all of you out there who got straight A's and scored high on your SAT (if you can remember back that far!), it doesn't necessarily mean that you can learn the visual skills needed to excel at tasks like matching fingerprints, interpreting medical X-rays, keeping track of aircraft on radar displays or forensic face- matching.

That is the implication of a new study which shows for the first time that there is a broad range of differences in people’s visual ability and that these variations are not associated with individuals’ general intelligence, or IQ.

“People may think they can tell how good they are at identifying objects visually,” says Isabel Gauthier, David K. Wilson Professor of Psychology at Vanderbilt University, who headed the study. “But it turns out that they are not very good at evaluating their own skills relative to others.”
In the past, research in visual object recognition has fo…

Researchers from Leeds Beckett University are challenging the myth that extreme sports enthusiasts push themselves to the max and take risks no matter what the consequences.

Wingsuit flying is a relatively new parachute sport which involves a specifically designed jumpsuit that facilitates forward motion and directional control, according to newswise.com. It is considered the most dangerous parachute sport as it involves flying close to structures at speeds of over 200 mph, where a mistake or accident would most likely result in death, the web site maintains.

“When you think of the people involved in such extreme sports, you tend to think of risk takers who push themselves to the limit," says Dr Eric Brymer, a Reader in the Carnegie School of Sport. &quo…

How can something invented barely 20 years ago in Japan (has it really been that long?). And who came up with the word???

In any event, a new report investigates what effect they have on pretty much the last place you'd expect them. The workplace. Or, at least, the places I worked. In fact, sending and receiving emojis in the workplace could have an impact on productivity and innovation in the workplace, according to newswise.com.

University of Delaware management professor Kyle Emich has explored the effects of emotions on teams and performance and is now taking on what effect, if any, they have on innovation and productivity.
"In our lab, we normally induce emotional states by showing people happy or sad video clips or pictures," he tells newswise.com. "For example, we…

I'm in the frenetic, not fast, lane, writing a medical technology web column about robots and imaging and all the ways you can stave off aging (if only) and essays about parenting without losing your sanity, and trying to raise a 10-year-old!